Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
God is Love. God loves us all. God wills that all men will come to repentance and be saved. God will reconcile all things to himself. If one person goes to hell love has failed and as God is love that means God fails.
God does not fail in anything. I know people talk about God's justice being equal to his love but where does it say justice does not fail or that God is justice. Love trumphs all other things, justice, forgiveness,lawbreaking,sin. and any other thing you can think of. God will always win so Love will always win.
How does a person rejecting God make God a failure?
I absolutely believe it, but we have to be careful in our communication - God doesn't change (in conforming His will to our carnality), we do (our nature must be changed to His).
What I've seen of the presentation doesn't explain the path of salvation well enough for me; it leaves the door opened for people to believe God will always accept them as they are - while we come as we are, we don't stay in that state.
There's judgment for the Adamic nature - now or later, imo. That's what I want the world to know, that God is indeed holy.
God loves a person. For arguments sake that person rejects God's love forever. Therefore God's love did not win with that person.
Isn't that obvious?
You said above God loves everyone. So does "that" love win?
Remember:
Love never fails
Love covers over all wrongs
Love conquers all
God is love
I believe this verse
1Jn 4:19 We love him, because he first loved us.
Is a demonstration of cause and effect.
A person who loves God does so only because it was an effect of the cause. The Cause of course is that God first loved us.
When people say that we can reject Gods love, the issue is if we can actually resist forever.
Scripture takes that idea on too.
Ro 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Proverbs 16:9 hones in on the nature of mans will.
We can think and devise a way , but God direct our steps. This does not make us puppets, it simply means that ultimatly the intention of Gods love (us loving him)..... WINS.
God loves a person. For arguments sake that person rejects God's love forever. Therefore God's love did not win with that person.
Isn't that obvious?
You said above God loves everyone. So does "that" love win?
Remember:
Love never fails
Love covers over all wrongs
Love conquers all
God is love
Legoman,
In my opinion, you're taking great liberties with scriptural application. The things you post are true, but the context you try to apply them is not.
When you said what you said about love (Love never fails
Love covers over all wrongs Love conquers all) I believe you are quoting I Corinthians 13, is that correct?
Isn't that letter written TO believers? It's not a letter to lost folks. It's a letter to folks IN CHRIST. And actually speaks to our security in Christ. The previous chapter calls the audience the body of Christ and that they "were pagans" (in the past). How can you take that and apply it broadly to everyone ever born?
I'm not talking about their lives....I'm talking about their (your) belief system.
Yes, I'm talking about "belief systems" too, which I think you will see is obvious from my previous post to you. How do you come to the conclusion that people who do not hold to your particular beliefs have an "easy" belief system simply because we do not accept the notion that there is a vindictive god?
Yes, I'm talking about "belief systems" too, which I think you will see is obvious from my previous post to you. How do you come to the conclusion that people who do not hold to your particular beliefs have an "easy" belief system simply because we do not accept the notion that there is a vindictive god?
I'm sorry if I didn't convey my opinion accurately.
What I mean is that it would seem to me that a person who is either atheist or universalist wouldn't be overly "burdened" by a person outside of Christ. I'm confident I'm correct from an atheistic standpoint (why would someone who rejects the notion of God care about a friend outside of Christ) but I may be mistaken about a universalist, though I don't know why they'd be too burdened since everyone's going to be saved anyway.
In my opinion, you're taking great liberties with scriptural application. The things you post are true, but the context you try to apply them is not.
When you said what you said about love (Love never fails
Love covers over all wrongs Love conquers all) I believe you are quoting I Corinthians 13, is that correct?
Isn't that letter written TO believers? It's not a letter to lost folks. It's a letter to folks IN CHRIST. And actually speaks to our security in Christ. The previous chapter calls the audience the body of Christ and that they "were pagans" (in the past). How can you take that and apply it broadly to everyone ever born?
Am I incorrect in my thought process here?
Hi Alpha,
I appreciate your explanation, but yes I think you are incorrect in your thought process. While it is true that 1 Cor 13 is a letter to believers, that does not restrict its application or context. These are global truths. I would say you are taking great liberty to say 1 Cor 13 only applies for believers.
Are you trying to say that God's love never fails for believers, but God's love always fails for unbelievers?
If 1 Cor 13 is not a letter to "lost folks"... how would any of us ever be saved? WE were all lost. We didn't find Him. If "love never fails" does not apply to love for "unbelievers" - which we all were at one point - there was no assurance for any of us.
These things can only be viewed one way.
God's love never fails. Period. There are no contextual restrictions on that statement.
You agree that God loves all people - do you agree we only love Him because He loves us? Do you think someone can resist God's love forever, thus reducing God's love to little more than wasted effort? This is what we are talking about Alpha.
God's love cannot fail. Its not just for believers. Otherwise no one has any assurance. Is God's love sometimes wasted effort?
I appreciate your explanation, but yes I think you are incorrect in your thought process. While it is true that 1 Cor 13 is a letter to believers, that does not restrict its application or context. These are global truths. I would say you are taking great liberty to say 1 Cor 13 only applies for believers.
Are you trying to say that God's love never fails for believers, but God's love always fails for unbelievers?
If 1 Cor 13 is not a letter to "lost folks"... how would any of us ever be saved? WE were all lost. We didn't find Him. If "love never fails" does not apply to love for "unbelievers" - which we all were at one point - there was no assurance for any of us.
These things can only be viewed one way.
God's love never fails. Period. There are no contextual restrictions on that statement.
You agree that God loves all people - do you agree we only love Him because He loves us? Do you think someone can resist God's love forever, thus reducing God's love to little more than wasted effort? This is what we are talking about Alpha.
God's love cannot fail. Its not just for believers. Otherwise no one has any assurance. Is God's love sometimes wasted effort?
I see (and believe the scriptures teach) the healing and restorative power of God's love to be something like a salve.
There's this endless supply of ointment that is without effect if it's not applied to the wounded and broken. It's obvious I believe in freewill....so yes, I believe that a person has the ability to accept that ointment or to reject it.
Moderator cut: off topic
Last edited by Miss Blue; 03-10-2011 at 12:20 PM..
I'm sorry if I didn't convey my opinion accurately.
What I mean is that it would seem to me that a person who is either atheist or universalist wouldn't be overly "burdened" by a person outside of Christ. I'm confident I'm correct from an atheistic standpoint (why would someone who rejects the notion of God care about a friend outside of Christ) but I may be mistaken about a universalist, though I don't know why they'd be too burdened since everyone's going to be saved anyway.
Sorry if I presented my opinion offensively.
No worries. I'm not offended at all. Just pointing out what I saw as an unhelpful generalization.
You said this:
Quote:
It's actually interesting to see this latest revealing of Universalism. I believe it (Universalism) is the new atheism. It's easy. Requires nothing. There's no urgency of the gospel. No necessity to endure. No reason to follow Christ NOW. No consequence and no requirement for living righteously.
Are you saying, now, that you did not mean the bolded portion? That'd be a step in the right direction.
As far as being burdened for people to come to know Christ in the way I believe you mean, you are right, I am not. However, if I were to venture so far as to say that I can potentially see "Christ" as being symbolic for a spirit of selfless love that serves others, and the freedom that principle gives to individuals and to humanity as a whole, then I do desire that for everyone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
